Wall Street's top regulator faces worsening battle in wake of Supreme Court ruling
By Chris Prentice and Pete Schroeder
WASHINGTON, June 28 (Reuters) -The Supreme Court's move to curb federal agency powers could curtail efforts by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to establish new rules to police Wall Street and invite more litigation, legal experts said in the wake of Friday's landmark ruling.
The court overturned a 1984 precedent that had given deference to government agencies in interpreting laws they administer. The decisionraises the specter of fresh grounds on which to challenge the markets watchdog in court as it rolls out new policies or seeks to regulate new corners of the markets.
The SEC is already fending off an increasing legal assault from public companies, major Wall Street firms and well-heeled cryptocurrency players.
The SCOTUS decision, made 6-3, is likely to tie the SEC's hands as it rolls out new rules, according to half a dozen legal experts.
The SEC did not respond to a request for comment. SEC Chair GaryGensler told Reuters this month that the agency pivots as required by courts' interpretation of the law.
The ruling is a "game-changer," said Richard Hong, a former SEC trial lawyer and partner with the Morrison Cohen law firm.
The SEC will likely have more reason to pause before acting when seeking to police new financial instruments, said Cary Coglianese, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in regulation.
"It will make it more difficult for agencies to adapt their understandings of statutes in the face of new circumstances," Coglianese said.
The precedent, known as the Chevron deference after a ruling involving the U.S. oil company,had been cited by the SEC and other agencies in prior court cases to justify new regulatory efforts, as they deemed the activities within their purview. But now it would fall solely to a court to determine if the agency is acting within the law, which experts saidcould have a chilling effect.
Proponents of the approach argue that the Chevron deference allows federal regulatory bodies to adapt to changing times and circumstances. But the Chevron doctrine has come under growing criticism from conservatives, arguing it allows rule-writers to overstep their legal authorities.
While the SEC and other regulators have other tools on which to lean, Chevron has been a bedrock of agency rulemaking.
Between 2003 and 2013, Chevron was applied 66.7% of the time when litigating SEC rules in circuit courts and in those cases the agency won just over 81%, according to 2017 research published in the Michigan Law Review.
"Going forward, agency action will be under even greater scrutiny and there will likely be more opportunities for the regulated community to challenge agency rules and adjudications," said Varu Chilakamarri, a partner at K&L Gates.
Friday's ruling is the latest effort of the conservative "war on the administrative state", which aims to weaken federal agencies across the board. Gensler's ambitious agenda has made the agency, which oversees around 40,000 entities, a top target.
The SEC stayed this year's landmark climate disclosurerule due to legal challenges. A federal appeals court this month struck down its overhaul of private fund oversight on the grounds the agency exceeded its authorities.
“The challenge to the SEC’s climate rule was already poised to be a difficult fight for the agency," said Leah Malone, leader of Simpson Thacher’s ESG and sustainability practice. Friday's shift "raises even further questions about the survival of the climate rule, as well as other pending rule proposals that have been in the spotlight,” Malone said.
Friday's ruling is the second blow to the SEC's authority in as many days from the Supreme Court. On Thursday, the justices ruled the agency's reliance on in-house courts to handle enforcement cases was unconstitutional.
"If yesterday’s decision was causing tremors, causing some dishes to tumble out from the cupboards, today’s case is a Richter-7 earthquake," said Hong.
Reporting by Pete Schroeder and Chris Prentice
Additional reporting by Hannah Lang, Ross Kerber and Michelle Price; editing by Megan Davies and Rod Nickel
면책조항: XM Group 회사는 체결 전용 서비스와 온라인 거래 플랫폼에 대한 접근을 제공하여, 개인이 웹사이트에서 또는 웹사이트를 통해 이용 가능한 콘텐츠를 보거나 사용할 수 있도록 허용합니다. 이에 대해 변경하거나 확장할 의도는 없습니다. 이러한 접근 및 사용에는 다음 사항이 항상 적용됩니다: (i) 이용 약관, (ii) 위험 경고, (iii) 완전 면책조항. 따라서, 이러한 콘텐츠는 일반적인 정보에 불과합니다. 특히, 온라인 거래 플랫폼의 콘텐츠는 금융 시장에서의 거래에 대한 권유나 제안이 아닙니다. 금융 시장에서의 거래는 자본에 상당한 위험을 수반합니다.
온라인 거래 플랫폼에 공개된 모든 자료는 교육/정보 목적으로만 제공되며, 금융, 투자세 또는 거래 조언 및 권고, 거래 가격 기록, 금융 상품 또는 원치 않는 금융 프로모션의 거래 제안 또는 권유를 포함하지 않으며, 포함해서도 안됩니다.
이 웹사이트에 포함된 모든 의견, 뉴스, 리서치, 분석, 가격, 기타 정보 또는 제3자 사이트에 대한 링크와 같이 XM이 준비하는 콘텐츠 뿐만 아니라, 제3자 콘텐츠는 일반 시장 논평으로서 "현재" 기준으로 제공되며, 투자 조언으로 여겨지지 않습니다. 모든 콘텐츠가 투자 리서치로 해석되는 경우, 투자 리서치의 독립성을 촉진하기 위해 고안된 법적 요건에 따라 콘텐츠가 의도되지 않았으며, 준비되지 않았다는 점을 인지하고 동의해야 합니다. 따라서, 관련 법률 및 규정에 따른 마케팅 커뮤니케이션이라고 간주됩니다. 여기에서 접근할 수 있는 앞서 언급한 정보에 대한 비독립 투자 리서치 및 위험 경고 알림을 읽고, 이해하시기 바랍니다.
